I wonder if they are referring to expansions of service frequency, since there are very few new lines actually proposed on that map

https://twitter.com/samjmintz/status/1318910466798780416

The map is a little confusing because some existing lines are colored like new lines, but my interpretation of that is that Amtrak takes over Flyer operations from Oklahoma and Texas.

It almost looks like they got the colors on the Heartland flyer backwards, with the expansion is shown as an old route, and the existing service colored like it will be a new extention.

It almost looks like they got the colors on the Heartland flyer backwards, with the expansion is shown as an old route, and the existing service colored like it will be a new extention.my thoughts as well. Here is a link with a PDF presentation

https://www.railpassengers.org/happening-now/webinars/developing-new-amtrak-corridors-expanding-the-u.s-passenger-market/

It looks to me like Fort Worth --> OKC is the "2025" line and then OKC --> Newton is the "2030" line

that might be when Amtrak starts funding the lines.

Obviously OKC already has service to FTW (funded by OK-TX) and wants service to Newton (expected to be funded by OK-KS). My interpretation is Amtrak will take over funding of OKC-FTW by 2025 and OKC-KC/Newton by 2030. We definitely already have Vancouver Canada - Seattle - Portland (slated 2035 in twitter) then on to LA already on two routes (Amtrak Cascades and Pacific Starlight).

If only the Trump Admin would implement such a plan (or better/sooner). ..

I wish in a longer term plan, they would reroute it from KC to Tulsa to OKC To DFW with a link in Denton so travelers can hop to the light rail into Dallas, airports and future high speed Texas rails.

No offense to Newton but who wants to go there?

I wish in a longer term plan, they would reroute it from KC to Tulsa to OKC To DFW with a link in Denton so travelers can hop to the light rail into Dallas, airports and future high speed Texas rails.

No offense to Newton but who wants to go there?
Agree 100%.

I wish in a longer term plan, they would reroute it from KC to Tulsa to OKC To DFW with a link in Denton so travelers can hop to the light rail into Dallas, airports and future high speed Texas rails.

No offense to Newton but who wants to go there?

Plus unless there is some sort of major rescheduling, the train connection will be meeting in Newton will be around 3AM, in basically the worst possible window of any time for that. KC the train connections should be a much more reasonable 7:30 AM, and if you need to wait there should be much more could do.

I wish in a longer term plan, they would reroute it from KC to Tulsa to OKC To DFW with a link in Denton so travelers can hop to the light rail into Dallas, airports and future high speed Texas rails.

No offense to Newton but who wants to go there?

In fact, you could take this further, reroute the SW Chief awat from Newton and Trinidad, CO to KC, Tulsa, OKC, Amarillo to Albuquerque. Far higher access to ridership.

I wish in a longer term plan, they would reroute it from KC to Tulsa to OKC To DFW with a link in Denton so travelers can hop to the light rail into Dallas, airports and future high speed Texas rails.

No offense to Newton but who wants to go there?

Isn't Newton where it connects to the E/W going to Denver? Plus, Newton is just on the north side of Wichita. Lots of engineering and aerospace connectivity between OKC and Wichita.

In fact, you could take this further, reroute the SW Chief awat from Newton and Trinidad, CO to KC, Tulsa, OKC, Amarillo to Albuquerque. Far higher access to ridership.
That would be some train ride. Excellent track on BNSF Chicago to KC, then on the old FRISCO (BNSF) to Ft. Scott, then to Afton, then to Tulsa, then on the SLWC @ 25 to OKC. Now, north to Perry on the BNSF, and with a new connection, west on the old FRISCO to Enid, and Avard, and finally back on the old ATSF mainline to Amarillo.

A prior post said money would have to be spent - meaning new track where needed. You want more ridership, you need to bring the trains where the people are. They aren't in Newton, KS, SW Kansas, Trinidad, CO. Especially Newton, KS at 3AM.

the likely argument will be - wait for it. .... that people along the existing route will suffer if they lose it.

but I agree it should be rerouted to connect the major cities. I'd imagine very significant ridership on CHI-KC-TUL-OKC- DFW and OKC-AMA-ABQ. Western OK is more populated than Western KS. ...

Best case scenario is to do the KC-Wichita-OKC-FTW now, then add in KC-TUL-OKC-AMA-ABQ. OKC is the biggest beneficiary with three routes OKC-FTW (which is now), OKC-KC-CHI (likely umcoming), and OKC-ABQ (vision).

How can we make this happen? Significant ridership can be attained imo.

Has an actual fact based demand forecast been done for alternate routes? There are legit ways for obtaining the information. I would think that would be the first step.

The reroute is already being talked about, but it would be Newton (Wichita) to Wellington to Amarillo to Clovis to Belen, then to CA. Because of the cost of maintaining to old ATSF main line over Raton pass to Lamy, and to Albuquerque. Amtrak runs only one train each way, with NM leasing it from the BNSF. On a long distance train, somebody is going to get the train at 3am. Do you expect leaving Chicago at 3 am would be good for ridership? If the Rock Island had been saved you would have a direct route from OKC to Amarillo, and then west on ATSF mainline to CA. If Amtrak’s Lone Star had been saved, ( and I rode it a lot, as well as working as head brakeman, always had lot’s of passengers, purely political not to fund it), we would have a direct train to KC, CH, and south to FW, and Houston. You just can’t run without the rail being in shape, and to fix that, lot’s of money.

And when you feel safe on the train, I would suggest ride the train from Newton to Albuquerque and enjoy the trip over Raton pass while it’s still possible. Lovely ride over Raton, and Glorieta Pass.

https://twitter.com/PassRailOK/status/1330986882574979074



16591

https://twitter.com/PassRailOK/status/1330986882574979074

i wonder if all of those were agreed to, what the timeline would be. 2050 completion date?

no political in any way but Biden makes all of these rail projects more likely ..

no political in any way but Biden makes all of these rail projects more likely ..

I'm hoping for a large infrastructure bill. I would love for Colorado to receive a grant to fast track the front range rail system.

I really hope Biden pulls it off. I was reading an article today that suggested Biden was going to fast track the Hudson River rail tunnels which can’t come soon enough.

Biden is also a huge fan of Amtrak. I suspect we’ll see some good news on that end.

I asked the Passenger Rail OK twitter account for a link to their extension assessment report. Here it is:

http://passengerrailok.org/memberfiles/Heartland_Flyer_Extension_Update_030520.pdf

I asked the Passenger Rail OK twitter account for a link to their extension assessment report. Here it is:

http://passengerrailok.org/memberfiles/Heartland_Flyer_Extension_Update_030520.pdf
That’s a good read, interesting the Amtrak Lone Star ran a top speed of 79 mph back in 1979. Then the ATSF had ATS, which would stop the train if it went by a signal over speed. That, and “super elevation” on the curves, the outside rail being higher, allowing for a faster speed which has been removed. But the train ran without the track and bridge improvements proposed. A definite wish list to improve the freight train operation at somebody else’s expense. There weren’t many places where the train actually went 79 mph. If all those improvements where made, then a commuter train Edmond to Norman would be a possibility.

I'm hoping for a large infrastructure bill. I would love for Colorado to receive a grant to fast track the front range rail system.
I just read this article about a plan for the front range proposal and I have to say, as much as I’d love to see passenger rail in the US, what the f@ck are the leaders in CO thinking to believe that spending this much money on this is even remotely a good idea!?


That could cost $1.5 billion to $2.5 billion, according to a draft report presented to the Front Range Passenger Rail Commission on Friday. A second phase would add service between Colorado Springs and Pueblo at a cost of $200 million to $300 million.

“This approach allows for a starter service and ultimately supports the rail commission's longer-term vision,” Carla Perez, senior strategic consultant with global design firm HDR, told the commission. “But it's really a way of getting this program going.”

An adjustment of Amtrak’s Southwest Chief under discussion now that would add service to Pueblo could connect some Eastern Plains communities and Trinidad to the Front Range line as well.

The commission’s longer-term vision is for a much faster, more frequent, and costlier line stretching from Cheyenne, Wyoming to Trinidad and perhaps points south. Speeds would top out at 90 to 110 miles per hour on newly laid track, trains would run every 30 minutes at peak times, and it all could cost between $7.8 billion to $14.2 billion.

"That number is something that probably we won't be looking at in terms of seeing on the ground for probably 20 to 30 years from now,” said Randy Grauberger, director of the rail project. “But it's certainly the long-term vision, when the population of Colorado supports that and we have the money available."

- https://www.cpr.org/2020/12/04/front-range-rail-project-gets-a-rough-2b-price-tag-as-rtd-looks-to-jump-on-board/?fbclid=IwAR08rDwb9GcxFfGRGZNqYEoa6R5FYTf20_xLW_qD zRVCczeCRG3ogosDOOM

Unreal. 15 billion for a train moving 110 MPH between two cities 70ish miles apart to serve 8-9k passengers a day when it is built decades from now. That plan requires an interim solution of using existing freight tracks with upgrades and train orders coming in a 2-3 billion so the train can move roughly at a 45MPH average speed.

Why not just revise the I-25 plan to remove tolls, build the new lane free, build an eighth lane for busses only with cars available to use it for a high toll to ensure busses moving at a minimum speed of 65-70MPH, and use the left over billions to either address the backlog of road and rail maintenance projects or pump it all into better transit systems for the metros of CS and Denver which would in turn likely induce more riders into a Denver-CS BRT system?

Rail has always been expensive. And "why not just use buses" has long been a proposed "fix" for rail. Don't you ever wonder why there isn't an amazing, high speed, national bus system by now?

Rail has always been expensive. And "why not just use buses" has long been a proposed "fix" for rail. Don't you ever wonder why there isn't an amazing, high speed, national bus system by now?
Good point but in this case we’re talking about two cities less than 100 miles apart. I understand rail is more expensive and no doubt has its advantages.

Japan is building a MagLev line running over 300MPH between Osaka and Tokyo(some of the most densely populated cities on earth) for around 50 billion. Those two cities are 180 miles apart and have several mountainous terrain segments between them requiring extensive tunneling.

Doing some ballpark math, why is Japan able to build a train traveling 300+MPH that levitates with magnets through a mountainous terrain in tunnel after tunnel for for less than 300 million per mile when it takes us around 215 million per mile to build a train on relatively flat terrain that only goes 110 MPH!?

I’m not suggesting the typical “why not high speed busses nationwide” argument. Again, keep this in perspective. These busses really aren’t high speed, just going at highway speeds which almost twice as fast as the proposed average train speed with the interim plan that will be with us for decades. The existing nationwide bus network(Greyhound) sucks and has no doubt helped to enforce a negative bus stereotype many hold in America. But in Asia and South America bus systems prove to be an amazing assets.

I support a national HSR system. I’ve argued time and time again with many who claim a national HSR system doesn’t make sense and only regional does. I’m not anti rail. But this plan is insanity and if this is any indication of the future costs of rail than we need serious infrastructure reform now. I can only imagine the cost of building and upgrading rail through the Rocky Mountains. Might make California’s ridiculous failure(which I doubt sees the light of day) look like a bargain.

PS, I’m not naive. No doubt rail can and does have a higher overall capacity(when done right) and generally has better overall reliability given it can generally operate in inclement weather whereas a bus might have be delayed. I bet trains also boast a higher safety rating. Even then, I still don’t like this proposal and think we should stick with busses until costs can get under control.

The area between Colorado Springs and Denver is not western Oklahoma. Terrain is a big issue, with a 2,000 foot elevation change as you pass between the two cities. This area is called the Palmer Divide, and it regularly gets snow events measured in feet from Nov through May. The highway system regularly closes between the two metros during the winter time. Trains can plow through the snow with ease. Buses cannot.

Also this $15 billion number you are quoting is for the full 110mph system from Cheyenne WY to Pueblo, CO which is 213 miles. Only $1.5-2 billion for Ft Collins to Co Springs. Very reasonable really as that is the section that would have the most immediate impact between Colorado's 2 largest cities which have very unreliable travel times between them. I-25 closures can last days at a time in the winter. If you read the article you posted they say that is a long term goal, likely 20 to 30 years away. But getting the pieces together for Ft Collins-Denver-Springs-Pueblo can be done for a lot less than that.

Idk man for 15 billion the train should be maglev lol. But seriously the train should move faster than 110MPH.

I lived in Colorado for literally nine months but I can promise you that was enough time to realize that they'll never be able to expand I-25 wide enough to keep up with the exploding population everywhere between Colorado Springs and Fort Collins. Everywhere in between the north side of C-470 and Fort Collins is sprawling out nearly as much as the northern Dallas suburbs. The Denver/Colorado Springs corridor isn't growing quite as quickly due in part to the terrain issues that catch mentioned, but even there, Castle Rock will easily be around 100k people in a couple of decades and there's plenty of new development happening up around the Air Force Academy.

Hate to say but another study here. At the very least talks are happening which is better than nothing. Hopefully with Biden we’ll get some real passenger rail improvements in Oklahoma.

https://twitter.com/oklahomatransit/status/1374833329502089221?s=21

Amtrak has proposed a massive overhaul and expansion with Oklahoma's Heartland Flyer Route to get enhanced service and an extension to Newton. This is Oklahoma's chance to really invest in statewide passenger rail and even connect to Tulsa.

https://i.insider.com/60659ef0daf0f10018f9966d

https://www.businessinsider.com/map-amtrak-could-build-expanded-rail-network-biden-infrastructure-plan-2021-4

Lmao what a stupid idea

I’m on the fence about some of the plans. I’m very excited for expanded service in Oklahoma though.

South Dakota: "Can we have rail?"

Amtrak. "No."

It would help if South Dakota actually had more than just one person who could ask for it.

I would really love that. It would be cool to take the train to Oklahoma City from up here, too bad there isn’t a Pueblo to La Junta connection (there is an existing BNSF mainline track between the two cities, but not sure if it has PTC or appropriate sidings to allow for mixed traffic

Rail has always been expensive. And "why not just use buses" has long been a proposed "fix" for rail. Don't you ever wonder why there isn't an amazing, high speed, national bus system by now?

Specifically in that Colorado front range situation, busses would not work several days each year at high speed due to snow. Snow is generally never a problem for rail.

It seems like rail service gets suspended all the time during major snowstorms in the NE. I’m not sure if that is the case in Europe though.

It seems like rail service gets suspended all the time during major snowstorms in the NE. I’m not sure if that is the case in Europe though.

Cold air more than snow. It may sound silly but the NE gets a lot more cold weather than the front range does.

It seems like rail service gets suspended all the time during major snowstorms in the NE. I’m not sure if that is the case in Europe though.

Just moved back to the States from Germany. They shut down/delay the trains during heavy snow. Bavaria had a few days of interrupted service due to some heavy snow this past winter. They work really heard to open it back fast since so many people rely on it.

It seems like rail service gets suspended all the time during major snowstorms in the NE. I’m not sure if that is the case in Europe though.

Yes, RRs get shut down for snow in Europe. It isn't all that uncommon. In fact, my wife and I had tickets on the Orient Express a few years ago and it was cancelled for an early season snowstorm. Northern Europe has rail interruptions for snow every year.

BNSF/UP on the Colorado Springs Sub (between Denver and COS) are running freight very quickly after major storms, where I-25 can take many hours or even a day to get open after a significant winter storm.

That line handles 15 or so trains a day, many are unit trains of coal for the power plants in Colorado Springs and Pueblo. Pretty important line for them to keep open especially in the winter. Not saying your examples aren’t valid but the front range passenger rail line is important in the rapidly growing region, and will have better reliability in the winter than the highway. I am for an all of the above transportation solution, Road, rail, and plane.

My issue with the front range proposal is the complete amateur joker proposal of a 45 MPH train costing several billion to build. I mean when you factor in walking and possible transfers who in their right mind would take this thing? It’s even worth to suffer traffic in Los Angeles than take a train than averages 45 MPH. Build the damn thing right or don’t build and widen I-25 to 8 lanes. The toll lane on I-25 is a joke as well. Colorado has been making some very questionable moves in regards to its transportation network.

I’m all for rail and an all of the above option too but with 3+ billion I don’t see how that couldn’t fund an 8 lane I-25 with free BRT AND a fleet of plows dedicated to keeping the small stretch of I-25 clear during storms.

2 different areas for funding rail.
85B for modernizing public transit. Commuter rail, stations, buses, etc. 80B to improve and expand freight and passenger service. Folks in Phoenix are excited about the possible return of passenger service.

Amtrak's 2035 Map Has People Talking About The Future Of U.S. Train Travel : NPR
https://www.npr.org/2021/04/06/984464351/as-biden-pushes-major-rail-investments-rail-amtraks-2035-map-has-people-talking

Imagine if we did this here and what it would/could do for the train network, especially if it drove capacity and faster trains.

France to ban some domestic flights where train available
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/apr/12/france-ban-some-domestic-flights-train-available-macron-climate-convention-mps


French MPs have voted to suspend domestic airline flights on routes that can be travelled by direct train in less than two and a half hours, as part of a series of climate and environmental measures.

I’d rather not go that route.

No surprises

Not saying it would ever happen here because it wouldn’t. But that would absolutely decimate the airline industry.

No surprises
Sure not and thankfully that has about as much of a chance as building the Midtown Expressway in Manhattan.

Imagine if we did this here and what it would/could do for the train network, especially if it drove capacity and faster trains.

France to ban some domestic flights where train available
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/apr/12/france-ban-some-domestic-flights-train-available-macron-climate-convention-mps

Since we don’t have TVG trains on their own dedicated right of ways, this isn’t of much concern.

https://twitter.com/PassRailOK/status/1382839800965648387


Oklahoma House Approves HCR1003 for
@Amtrak
#HeartlandFlyer extension, OKC-Newton, Kansas and second frequency Ft. Worth-OKC-Wichita-Kansas City. On to senate next. Resolutions voices support for extension with no funding commitment.

With no funding commitments lol... well I’m glad at least they’re doing that. It’s a start.

With no funding commitments lol... well I’m glad at least they’re doing that. It’s a start.

No funding= "All hat and no cattle". Talk is cheap and meaningless coming from State leadership. This does nada.

that might be when Amtrak starts funding the lines.

Obviously OKC already has service to FTW (funded by OK-TX) and wants service to Newton (expected to be funded by OK-KS). My interpretation is Amtrak will take over funding of OKC-FTW by 2025 and OKC-KC/Newton by 2030. We definitely already have Vancouver Canada - Seattle - Portland (slated 2035 in twitter) then on to LA already on two routes (Amtrak Cascades and Pacific Starlight).

If only the Trump Admin would implement such a plan (or better/sooner). ..

Apologies for the reply to a months-old post, but I'm getting back in the swing of keeping up with OKCTalk again... To clear up any misconceptions: The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2009 (PRIIA) included a mandate to implement a standardized cost-sharing methodology for all Amtrak routes shorter than 750 miles under Section 209. Basically, for routes shorter than 750 miles, the state(s) that the train travels through must share a proportional cost of operating the service. Even if the Heartland Flyer service was expanded up to Newton, KS from it's current terminus of OKC, the total route length would still only be approx. 400 miles - and the current cost sharing structure would still apply, meaning we'd still be on the hook for yearly operational costs. My understanding is Oklahoma's financial share of operating the full route from Ft Worth to Newton via OKC would be a little less than double what it is today, which will likely be a tough sell to lawmakers who hold the purse strings.

Money and political willpower are the two things that are doing the most to hamper progress here. If Biden's infrastructure plan comes to fruition, there'd be a pot of money that Amtrak and states could use to shore up the rail infrastructure between here and Newton, which would certainly lower the barriers to getting this expanded service on track. But as noted above, it will be difficult for lawmakers to stomach the additional yearly operational costs, even despite the projected increase in economic activity (and tax revenues) that would be directly attributable to the service expansion.

Lots of moving pieces and potential roadblocks here. If you want to see the Heartland Flyer service get expanded, then it's imperative that you reach out to your elected representatives on all levels - local, state, and federal. Express your support for the current Heartland Flyer service, investments in passenger rail infrastructure under the American Jobs Plan, and the proposed service extension. Despite being a priority for Amtrak, without local/state buy-in the expansion is very unlikely to happen.

Does anyone know if the infrastructure bill as it stands now has money in it for the Heartland Flyer connection up to Kansas?

Last I heard the bill still is in the senate and has yet to be sent to the house. They are still amending it to its final form where the house can vote on it. I’d make sure to talk to your representatives and tell them to push for more HF funding. But from what I’ve read there is a lot of support for it so I bet it has a good chance of happening.

Does anyone know if the infrastructure bill as it stands now has money in it for the Heartland Flyer connection up to Kansas?

It does, but I don't believe it's directly earmarked for the HF in the bill. My understanding from the public meetings that Amtrak has held regarding service expansion is that they view an extension of the Heartland Flyer route as one of their top priorities, and the plan is to use part of the $66B they will receive from the infrastructure bill to directly pay the additional costs incurred by service expansion - both capital and operational - for the first few years. The Heartland Flyer would see the route extended up to Newton, KS by way of Guthrie, Ponca City, and Wichita, and two additional daily frequencies would be added between OKC and FTW.

It's a bit light on the details, but here's Amtrak's fact sheet on the proposed expansion: http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Heartland-Flyer-Extension-Fact-Sheet-FINAL.pdf

Thanks for the link.

With 3x daily, there is potential for a small taste of commuter rail from Norman to Downtown OKC right there; if the timing works out. It won't for most situations, but it is $12 round trip from Norman to OKC on Amtrak.com